Variations of this song have been sung by Pre-Israel Jews, and the Orthodox still do.
In the latter's case, it means expelling Arabs from all the river to the sea.
Palestinians are now trying a play on words, by taking the Jewish-origin chant and using it to mean freedom for Arabs from the river to the sea.
You don't need to kill everyone to get that, but you do need to actually grant people freedom. What stands in the way: the Israeli government, and a number of Arab dictatorships.
Those who call it hate speech, claim that those who chant it, don't mean freedom, and instead they want Jews expelled.
Reality is that there are people in the crowd who really mean "freedom" and some who really mean "kill the Jews".
@Moon3624 Look back in history, the arabs took the land from the Jews and created Palestine, and in 1948 the Jews took it back. That land has changed hands so many times no one knows who had it originally, God gave the Jews that land in the Old Testament, so does divine command carry more weight?
@fanuc2013 “ Look back in history, the arabs took the land from the Jews and created Palestine, ”
Nope they didn’t😂 clearly never grabbed a history book.
The Arabic army took it from the Byzantines not the Jews and this was more than 1400+ years ago . And Omar which was the second Islamic caliph at that time called back many Jewish families who were expelled from Jerusalem by the Romans back into it . And if we look at historical records , the Arab army Didn’t displace the indigenous population there or commit a genocide (like how Israel did!) They just ruled over them And over time The indigenous people converted to Islam and some didn’t convert and remained Jewish and Christian etc and adapted Arabic since it’s the language of who was ruling over them (just like Egypt today speaks Arabic despite the fact most of them decedent from ancient Egyptians) This is why the Christian Palestinian families are some of the oldest Christian families in the world going back to the time of Jesus himself And by the way, the whole history of Jews Being expelled by their own god from that land Be it 2000 years or 3000 years or 5000 years ago is a biblical story and not actual history That we can depend on for facts And even jews aren’t the indigenous people to that land according to their own Torah. Their Torah states that Abraham migrated from Iraq to Palestine and that The indigenous people of Palestine are the Canaanites and did you know that Canaanite dna is prominent in Lebanese and Palestinians? “ The results showed that modern Lebanese can trace more than 90 percent of their genetic ancestry to Canaanites.”
Here is dna of the Palestinians compared to ashkenazi Jew :
The only “claim” Israel has is “my subjective holy book and God promised me this land and I’m God’s chosen people “ Which makes you no different than isis. In fact worse.
Palestinians have faced more than 75 years of land annexation and theft, massacres, apartheid and violence To this day it’s happening There is an ongoing apartheid by Israel against the Palestinians It’s called an apartheid state By the UN, Harvard , amnesty and so on Do you really have the face to say that?
And who told you there were no Jews in that land before the creation of Israel?
@fanuc2013 legitimate modern nations don't take territory by force. That's against the law - Americans kill and confuse to stop us from following laws. Human rights were the law, but Americans kill them.
No. Because freedom doesn't call for killing unless the oppressor will kill to oppress a victim people from their freedom, thus MAKING it a fight that requires killing. And since when is defending yourself against someone killing you a genocide?
Imagine Palestinians could just live freely ._. Like what genocide. What fight?
@specman That's what so good about this forum. We all get to learn new things by interacting with each other and by challenging each others' opinions. When I first came across the nuke test in Mississippi several years agoI was surprised because I had never heard of it. IMO, it's not the best place to test nukes. And all of those atmospheric tests didn't seem to affect the environment too much.
I think just looking at the diverse replies on here shows it means different things to different people. A recent Guardian article stated,
"'Between the river and the sea' is a fragment from a slogan used since the 1960s by a variety of people with a host of purposes. And it is open to an array of interpretations, from the genocidal to the democratic."
That about sums it up. Nobody here (or anywhere) can definitively say what it means, as it all depends on who's saying it, in what context and what their specific intent behind it is. It's become a propaganda slogan with a variety of interpretations, and thus is now practically meaningless. It serves the inherent human desire to take huge complexity and reduce it to a simplistic idea summed up by a pithy line. It's become pointless in any serious debate. It might as well be a slogan for a washing powder or an advert for hair shampoo.
@Moon3624 if you don't see this as a complex issue, then I'll put that down to your youth (and I don't mean that to be patronising). It's one of the most complex issues in modern history, which is why we're still dealing with it. Irrespective of its beginnings, do you think the Jews are going to quit Israel? Do you think violent factions of Hamas will simply live peacefully alongside Jews after some deal has been arranged? Do you think the entirety of Hamas can be eradicated? I just said the issue was complex, I didn't say there were two moral sides to it - complexity doesn't necessarily involve moral principles.
Plus, my point was regarding the meaning behind the chant, not who is morally qualified to say it, and I explained that the diverse comments show that it does mean different things to different people. The question in the original post asked if it was specifically a call to genocide, which I don't think it is. You're addressing a completely different question in your reply to me.
@Richard65 “ if you don't see this as a complex issue,” I didn’t need to finish the sentence. Apartheid is not a complex issue. Educate yourself You are welcome to read my content
@Moon3624 you seem to completely misunderstand my point. You're focused on morality and as I've said, complexity doesn't necessarily involve moral principles. A maths problem is complex, does that mean it's moral? The definition of complex is: Something so complicated or intricate as to be hard to understand or deal with. Where does morality come into it? The situation in Gaza right now IS a complex problem to solve. You seem to think waving a magic wand will somehow solve it.
The Pro-Palestine supporters are chanting for a ceasefire as far as I've seen... so, what confuses me more than anything is how their chants could be a call to arms???
They just want the invaders out of their country - which I think we would all want if we woke up tomorrow to find ourselves invaded by Al Quieda... remember that most Palestinians are not Hamas.
If nothing else, there should be a ceasefire to allow those that are trying to get out the chance they need to make their escape.
Actually, the public stated goals of the Zionists is to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing of all non-Jews in the Levant.
The public stated goals of the Hamas leadership is to eliminate all Jews and Christians in the world.
Maybe the world should should have its own stated goal of eliminating both groups. After all, the Bible does. I'll bet that no deity would resurrect either group. That should end the religious fairytales for good.
It's a weaponized cry for attention by using a slogan that is known to arouse emotions. It is an example of how people feel validated by mobilizing around a slogan that is being used to manipulate them into a frenzy. It's a tool of cowards who like to see how many fools they can shepherd into acting like maniacs by feeding them a slogan.
Generally no, but there are some people who use it that way. There are also some people who say "black lives matter" and are legit racist against white people. But does that mean the phrase is always meant to be anti-white? Of course not.
Depends on whom is saying it and what they mean. For some it's simple a call for freedom, for others it's code for revenge.
For background information, I think it was summed up well here. https://similarworlds.com/culture-race/genocide/4870244-Is-from-the-river-to-the-sea-a-call-to-genocide?rid=58566850
@Emosaur the whole point I've been trying to make is that the vast majority of people who say that aren't mentioning it as a genocide. Perhaps you should take a day to listen to the people who use that slogan or have a conversation with them
I say yes. I know it's ostensibly about Palestinian freedom, but in order for them to own the entirety of the land currently occupied by Israel, all the people living in Israel would have to die.
SW-User
@LordShadowfire Would they? Or would they potentially live in a new state in Palestine that is not a Jewish ethno-state?
